Enabling Election Fraud
Every day I get two or three messages from the Democratic Party asking to “pitch in” to the campaign of Obama, Tammy Baldwin, and during the Recall Election, I would get a daily plea for Barrett. Yet, in election after election, when all the dust has settled and anomaly after anomaly show up, the email flow shifts the other way like a virtual teeter tooter. These messages from constituent to candidate carry subjects like “Election Fraud”, “Mis-dated Poll Tape”, “Support our Audit”, “Demand a Recount”. If the candidates’ campaign pleas for donations where met with the same indifference as the constituents pleas for help, the fund raising for Democratic campaigns would collect amounts near “0”.
When will the Democratic Party of Wisconsin WAKE UP?
The numbers provided by Neal Schulz on the face book group page “Wisconsin Counts” appear in the column on the right. What they represent is the difference in Democratic Margin for example in 2006 there was a margin of 55-45 that is a +10% Democrat and in 2010 that flipped and went to a 45-55 that is a -10% so the difference from 2006 to 2010 is a Dem -20%. What it demonstrates is a decline as massive as a free fall avalanche.
Yet when reasonable and highly educated people approach the Democratic Party Leadership, they are often met with all the cute smiles of a puppy that peed on the carpet. Look at the decline. Is this because of ineffective or under-funded campaign efforts? No. The rules are written against you. What’s more, the electronic voting system is outdated, programed by private corporations with NO transparency, and has been proven time after time to be HACKABLE. Read the figures in the pink column at the right. What is wrong with the picture?
95% Fund Raising 5% Investigation
While the Wis Dems were frantically sending out emails for campaign funds. Richard Charnin posted this article on May 24, 2012 to alert them (for the umpteenth time) of what was likely to happen on June 5.
Eleven days later, at about 9:00 p.m. we learned with the heart wrenching reality the truth of Richard Charnin’s numbers. It was FRAUD 1! Only a half hour earlier, before the “secret” exit polls of the major media sources were “adjusted” to reflect the incoming vote, the election was described as a “dead heat”. At 8:30 p.m. Dem’s hoped for Fraud 2 – not enough to steal the election – and we waited for a response from the Wis Dems, and we waited, and we are still waiting, but the Wis Dems emailer’s fingers are all tired out from fundraising past and future to cry FOUL.
Ordindary Citizens Forced to Conduct Audit via FOIA
With very little to no support from the Wis Dems, citizens filed open records orders across the state to inspect election materials. Like Richard Charnin, who provided election fraud proof through statistical data after the Supreme Court Election, when 7,000 votes were “found” by Kathy Nickolaus in Waukesha County, citizens were better prepared. They had learned how impenetrable the ears of the Democratic Party could be, even when faced with the decline of votes for candidates as shown in the pink column to the right.
Even as you read this, teams of citizens are volunteering to audit the votes cast in the June 5 recall election without political or financial support of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. They are not paid, they are not seeking power or office, they are not conspiracy theorists with nothing better to do than fill their egos with “gotcha” moments. They are following the advice of Fighting “Bob” La Follette and working in the “never ending struggle to make and keep the government representative”. Unfortunately, the politicians they “pitched in” for with donation of 5 – 50 dollars are quiet now. They do not want to risk their political future by aligning themselves with the people who collected recall signatures, knocked on doors, and raised money to launch recall campaigns as they ignore the figures in the pink column on the right.
What have citizens turned up so far?
Early send back of election materials in 23 counties
A private corporation with no oversight by any government agency colluded with County Clerks in 23 of the 72 counties of Wisconsin that employ the AVC Edge machine to break the law. The memory cards (cartridges) that hold the official election results were sent back to Command Central before the 21 day period they were to be kept secure. The early send back was first discovered in Crawford County (voted strongly for Obama in ’08, Barrett in ’10, Shilling in the Senate Recall, but Walker carried on June 5 +100 votes) and the
Buffaloed in Buffalo County
Another rural county, like many others, which showed a sudden shift for Walker in the Recall election when compared to previous elections. PLEASE NOTE: The 4% drop in turnout on the machine in Mondovi…?
BUFFALO COUNTY RECALL ELECTION RESULTS
Vendor: Command Central.
Equipment: AVC EDGE touscreen & Hand-counted paper ballots in all municipalities EXCEPT City of Mondovi which used Command Central Opscan (Probably Insight) and Edge touchscreen in the June 5th recall election.
TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS as of 2010: 8,358
County-wide 2012 turnout 5,599 = 67%
TOTAL REG VOTERS in EDGE & PAPER MUNIS: 6,938
2012 Turnout 4,699 = 67.73%
TOTAL REG VOTERS IN OPSCAN & EDGE MUNI (City of Mondovi): 1,420
2012 Turnout 900 = 63.5%
[Turnout 4 percent lower in Mondovi, where they used opscan machine]
Election Results since 2006:
2006 Gubernatorial Election
Jim Doyle Democratic 3,078 57.40%
Mark Green Republican 2,196 40.95%
2008 Presidential Election
Barack Obama Democratic 3,949 56.41%
John McCain Republican 2,923 41.76%
2010 Gubernatorial Election
Tom Barrett Democratic 2,174 44.56%
Scott Walker Republican 2,610 53.49%
2012 Walker REcall Election (pre-certification)
Tom Barrett Democratic 2,147 38.68%
Scott Walker Republican 3,403 61.32%
COINCIDENCE – Barrett’s 2010 and 2012 totals nearly the same, last 2 digits flipped… (until the GAB certification added another vote for him this year
SECURITY PROBLEMS with Accuvote Machine an list of Counties
Researchers Hack AccuVote Ts Voting Machine for $26
BlackBoxVoting published a redacted version of a paper describing the design flaw in Diebold AccuVote TSX and TS6 touchscreen election systems. Because of the seriousness of the flaw, the full report detailing the issue has only been distributed to a limited group of computer scientists, state and federal election officials, and security groups.
EXCERPT from The Complaint of Voter Action Wisconsin – by Mike B. Wittenwyler v. the State Elections Board VERIFIED COMPLAINT – 5.37, 5.40, 5.91, AND THE WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION, ART III, SEC 3
14 The subject DRE systems in particular have well-known, well documented security flaws that leave the machines vulnerable to election fraud through software tampering. These problems are of a nature that could afflict any DRE model, and include the following:
A. INADEQUATE LOCKS: The locks on DRE systems are woefully inadequate and easily circumvented. See Ariel J Feldman, J Alex Halderman and Edward W. Felten, Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine (Sept 13, 2006)
B MALICIOUS CODE: Once the lock has been circumvented, malicious code can be downloaded into the DRE system software, altering how the votes are tabulated without detection by the voter and without altering the voter verified paper audit trail (“VVAPI” See Ariel J Feldman, J, Alex.
C. SPREADING THE INFECTION: Once a machine is infected, the malicious codes can be passed from machine to machine through the memory cards, infecting countless other machines without circumventing the lock, See Ariel J Feldman, J Alex Halderman and Edward W. Felten, Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine (Sept 13, 2006)
D UNDETECTABLE CODE: There is no way to ensure detection of a malicious code. The GAO has concluded that malicious code can be present in a system and evade testing. GAO, Elections: Federal Effots to Improve Security and Reliability of Electronic Voting Systems are Under Way but Key Actitivies need to be Completed (Sept 2005)
JOHN WASHBURN: The Machine Rejected My Legally-Marked Ballot
The Diebold/Premier/Dominion AccuVote OS v1.96.6 infrared scanner erroneously rejected the ballot as over-voted. The chief inspector offered to hit the override button, but doing so would have switched my Democratic vote to Republican and my write-in vote to Republican as well
Legally marked ballot rejected
FOLLOWING AREAS IN WISCONSIN USE PREMIER ACCUVOTE TSX
This contains all known updates since the 2011/2012 Command Central deals and other changes…
CALUMET COUNTY – All Municipalities use Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchcreen EXCEPT Town of Charleston which has Hand-counted paper ballots and AccuVote TSX touchscreen
CALUMET/MANITOWOC COUNTY – City of Kiel Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan and Accuvote TSX touchcreen
DODGE COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote Opscan 1.96.6 and Accuvote TSX touchscreen
DODGE/FOND DU LAC COUNTY – City of Waupun- Premier Accuvote Opscan 1.96.6 and Accuvote TSX touchscreen
DODGE/WASHINGTON COUNTY – City of Hartford : Premier Accuvote Opscan 1.96.6 and Accuvote TSX touchscreen
DOOR COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
GREEN COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
GREEN/ROCK COUNTY – City of Brodhead; All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
JEFFERSON/WALWORTH COUNTY- City of Whitewater: [PRemier or Command Central?] Optech Eagle Opscan with Premier Accuvote TSX touchscreen
JUNEAU COUNTY – City of Mauston: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
KENOSHA COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
KENOSHA/WALWORTH COUNTY – Village of Genoa City: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
OZAUKEE COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
OZAUKEE/WASHINGTON COUNTY – Village of Newburg: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
SAUK COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
VILAS COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
WALWORTH COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
WASHINGTON COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
WAUSHARA COUNTY – City of Wautoma and Town of Marion : Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
WINNEBAGO COUNTY – All municipalities: Premier Accuvote ES 2000 Opscan with Accuvote TSX touchscreen
The latest statistical analysis from Richard Charnin
This is the latest statistical analysis of election fraud from Richard Charnin (pictured right) who predicted the what the fraud factor would look like ten days before the June 5 election. Now he is creating a model which will boil it down to the Municipality:
I just created a Muni Recall True Vote model based on the elections.xlsx data. It uses the 2008 Presidential and 2012 Recall recorded votes. This is just a quick, first-cut. I will be adding improvements over the next day or two. Richard Charnin’s latest Municipal Recall True Vote Model
Many people working on proving and providing evidence of election fraud have been attaching disclaimers to donations to the Wis Dems, and will not give a dime until steps are taken to investigate the proprietary secret programing of election machine providers like Command Central.
Current election law makes it a felony for officials to compare the paper ballots to the digital total at the end of the night. This should not be against the law, but made legal and transparent.
Meanwhile, it is suggested the Wis Dems look at the ribbon of failure presented in the column at the right and ask WHY?
DEM % DIF 2008 to 2010 decline
DEM 2012 to 2010 % DIFF decline
DEM 2012 to 2010 % DIFF increases
DEM 2012 to 2008 % DIFF decline
DEM 2012 to 2010 % DIFF decline
DEM % DIF 2008 to 2010 decline